How many firearms exist in the United States? How confident are we that these weapons are in capable hands? What happens when a gun owner is no longer responsible? What recourse can society take to ensure that the mentally unstable cannot easily harm themselves or others?

No one, including the U.S. government, knows for sure the number of guns in America. Estimates vary between 270 to 310 million weapons, or close to one firearm for every man, woman and child. Let’s assume the majority of these guns are purchased legally by responsible, law-abiding citizens. What happens when a stable gun owner becomes unstable? Since it is relatively easy to purchase any type of firearm (especially rifles) in most states, what happens when a dangerous person slips through the cracks?

In Florida a mentally unbalanced 18-year old was able to acquire a weapon despite numerous warning signs, including violent, threatening behavior. Over the past few years, the alleged Parkland Florida shooter had several run-ins with local police and was under the care of a behavioral therapist.

Local police were called to his home dozens of times for domestic violence situations, his school had expelled him for erratic behavior, and the FBI and other law enforcement agencies had received calls warning that he might attempt to carry out a school shooting.

Yet, there were no arrests and no recommendations for involuntary commitment, allowed per Florida law, for individuals deemed a danger to themselves or others. Thus, there was no official record that would prevent him from purchasing a weapon.

The gun dealer that sold the AR-15 semi-automatic rifle, used in the Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School shooting, followed proper protocol. The National Instant Criminal Background Check System (NICS) is not designed to analyze warning signs or calculate preemptively.

Certainly, more intervention and follow through was needed in this situation. But in too many cases, firearms are sold to individuals with no criminal or violent history yet with the inclination to do real harm. A red flag law provides law enforcement the authority to do something rarely feasible… confiscate guns from a dangerous person.

Five states have enacted red flag laws while 24 additional states, including Pennsylvania, are considering similar bills. The law establishes a judicial process in which guns could be temporarily seized from those deemed dangerous. The restraining order is requested by someone close to the individual — a parent or guardian, teacher or member of law enforcement — and evidence is presented before a judge. If the petition is granted, weapons are seized immediately and held for at least a year. An individual can challenge the order and a petition can be extended if a judge deems it necessary.

These laws are designed to be fair and transparent and are not intended to indiscriminately seize guns. In a meeting with members of Congress last week, President Trump offered his support but went a step too far, saying “take the guns first, go through due process second.” I disagree. Due process is a fundamental part of our nation’s legal framework and should not be so easily dismissed.

The purpose of red flag laws is not to eliminate guns but to safeguard a community or an individual from a potentially dangerous situation.

Red flag laws could stop the next mass shooting but they also could prevent an unstable person from taking his/her life. For someone undergoing emotional stress, easy access to a gun could be the difference between life and death. Ninety percent of people who attempt suicide with a gun die while 90 percent of those who use some other method live. Firearms offer little room for second chances.

Republican state Rep. Todd Stephens is introducing a red flag bill in Pennsylvania. This bipartisan solution could make a real difference when it comes to preventing gun violence.

The NRA opposes red flag laws while contending its support for keeping guns out of the hands of criminals and the mentally ill. The NRA should not prevent our elected officials from making Pennsylvania safer.

Call your state representative and ask that they co-sponsor Rep. Stephens’ bill. By supporting this measure, they could make real progress in protecting Pennsylvanians.

Pennsylvania is considered one of the most gerrymandered states in the nation. The state Supreme Court confirmed this last month that our congressional districts, drawn by republicans in 2011, are unconstitutional. They ordered that they be redrawn for 2018. This decision reaffirms how the current redistricting process is unfair and a way for political parties to manipulate our democracy.

Regardless of your political affiliation, gerrymandering violates your constitutional rights and weakens our democracy. Here are TEN reasons why you should be outraged regardless of which party is drawing the lines:

1) Right now, politicians are choosing their voters. It is a conflict of interest to allow elected officials to control redistricting and essentially select their constituents. Shouldn’t it be the other way around?

2) Redistricting is conducted behind closed doors. There is very little transparency to how district maps are drawn in Pennsylvania. There is no oversight, no public approval required, and no quality of standards.

3) Party “bigwigs” and special interests control the process. Politicians may not always have Pennsylvanians’ best interests in mind when drawing these maps. Pennsylvania is an important swing state and redistricting attracts a ton of money from out-of-state political players and special interests.

4) Voters lose their influence. If politicians benefit from safe, gerrymandered districts, they no longer need to listen to their constituents and, instead, are controlled by party leaders and special interests. They know that incumbents are rarely challenged in primaries and can easily retain their seats in general elections. So why should they care what you think?

5) Gerrymandering is further dividing us. There was a time in this country when republicans and democrats could work together. Gerrymandering forces candidates to appeal to their extreme bases and results in political gridlock in Harrisburg and in D.C.

6) Voters feel frustrated and choose not to turn out for important elections. If you don’t feel like you are represented, there is a good chance you are not. Safe, gerrymandered districts mean less choice at the ballot box and no consequences for politicians who vote against their constituents’ best interests.

7) Local governments are divided. Once upon a time, communities were kept intact through redistricting. Now, it is not unusual to see boroughs, cities, and school districts divided, literally and figuratively. This makes it difficult for local leaders to garner the attention of legislative and congressional representatives and can even pit communities against one another when it comes to government funding or support.

8) Independents and 3rd party voters have zero representation. Democrats may feel bamboozled by Pennsylvania’s gerrymandered districts but no one is more under-represented than the 3rd-party voters who have absolute no say in the process.

9) Gerrymandering can mean one-party control for decades. Republicans gerrymandered Pennsylvania’s districts in 2012 with a goal to firm up republican majorities for years to come. They failed to predict, however, that democrats would control the state Supreme Court and thus control legislative redistricting in 2021. No political party should have the ability to unilaterally rig the system and secure political power so far into the future.

10) Rural and urban communities unnecessarily compete. There is no doubt that rural and urban areas have distinct needs. With gerrymandering, these areas are intentionally cracked and split so that rural regions may be diluted in urban districts or vice versa. Thus, rural and/or urban issues may not receive the attention they deserve.

How do we fix this?

Fair Districts PA has a comprehensive proposal that would restore a working, representative democracy and end gerrymandering. Proposed legislation would:

• establish an independent commission that is representative of Pennsylvanians; [The commission would ensure representation of republicans, democrats, and 3rd parties and any approved map would require support from at least one member of each of these three groups. ]
• ensure an open process that allows for ample and meaningful public input; and
• end the practice of using voting data, party affiliation, or personal addresses when redistricting.

It all seems pretty reasonable and fair. Unfortunately, not one of our state legislators has signed on as co-sponsors to SB22 or HB722.

Call your legislators today and ask that they support a fair and transparent redistricting process. Visit FairDistrictsPA.com.

Nicole Faraguna is a founding member of Susquehanna Valley Progress and an organizing member of the Fair Districts PA – Susquehanna Valley group.

VICTORY!! The Pennsylvania Supreme Court ruled today that the 2011 Congressional district maps were “clearly, plainly, and palpably unconstitutional” and is requiring the General Assembly to redraw the map and the Governor to approve it by February 15.

We are thrilled with the decision of the PA Supreme Court. The League has been fighting against gerrymandering for nearly a quarter century – along with other allies in Pennsylvania. The Order is available here.

This lawsuit was intended to protect the rights of all voters, regardless of party affiliation. The creation of “safe” seats for either party undermines the ability of all voters to elect representatives of their choosing. We sued to make sure that elections will be decided by the voters, not by partisan politicians. Today’s decision rights a wrong that diluted the Pennsylvanian’s votes and undermined our democracy. This is a victory for all Pennsylvanians regardless of party – fair elections aren’t about Republicans or Democrats, it’s about all of us.

We are so thankful to work beside amazing lawyers from Arnold Porter Kaye and Scholer, LLP as well as the Public Interest Law Center. Their hard work advocating on behalf of Pennsylvania voters has paid off.

It’s important to note that these maps are a direct result of a process that gives elected officials the power, rather than the voters. We know that the current process has led to unfair maps. It’s time for legislators to listen to what Pennsylvanians are saying and change the process. Senate Bill 22 and House Bill 722 would change the process so an independent citizens redistricting commission was in charge of drawing the maps. It would give voters a voice in the process and mandate transparency. These bills were introduced over a year ago and have yet to get a hearing. It is time to move forward.

Our democracy only works if everyone’s vote has equal weight, and the “clearly, plainly and palpably unconstitutional” 2011 congressional districts map took the power from the people and put it in the hands of legislators. There’s more work to be done, but for today, we CELEBRATE!

In the midst of a serious drug epidemic, the Trump administration announced its intentions to crack down on a substance that many turn to for healing and relief. As we watch so many of our loved ones struggle with addiction to opioids and other deadly drugs, why is the Department of Justice waging war on marijuana?

The federal government considers marijuana a Schedule 1 drug (comparable to cocaine and heroin). This classification seems inaccurate. Schedule 1 drugs have no medicinal value, according to the government. Yet, there is scientific research demonstrating that medical cannabis can be used to treat a wide assortment of conditions, including PTSD, glaucoma, epileptic seizures and certain cancers. Marijuana is also less addictive and dangerous than cocaine or heroine (or even legal substances such as tobacco and alcohol).

Today, eight states have fully legalized marijuana while 28 others, including Pennsylvania, allow its use for medical treatments.

Federal regulations hinder states’ ability to legalize medical or recreational marijuana. The Obama administration attempted to alleviate this tension by directing federal law enforcement agencies not to interfere with state laws.

Trump’s Attorney General, Jeff Sessions, now threatens to make state law his business and, in doing so, could cause serious unintended consequences. For example, federal law prohibits anyone using illegal substances, including marijuana, from owning a firearm. Recently, the Pennsylvania State Police informed anyone legally obtaining a medical marijuana card that they would have to turn in their firearms. Should responsible gun owners be forced to give up their guns to seek legal medical treatment?

Perhaps the better question is: Why is the attorney general focusing on marijuana when, in the United States, 175 people die everyday from overdose of dangerous drugs? Overdose deaths have increased so dramatically that the U.S. life expectancy, which was trending upward, has decreased in the past two consecutive years, according to the CDC.

The opioid epidemic has impacted urban and rural areas alike, including here in the Susquehanna Valley. Pennsylvania lawmakers have even passed legislation allowing first responders to carry and administer naloxone, a life-saving drug that reverses an overdose.

Do you know how many cases of death by marijuana overdose have been recorded across the United States? Zero.

States that have legalized marijuana are seeing a decrease in overdose deaths. In Colorado, opioid-related deaths were increasing steadily since 2000. In 2014, after legalized recreational marijuana became available, a study published in the American Journal of Public Health concluded that the state’s overdose death rate began to decrease.

More research is needed to understand how marijuana might help those who are prone to drug addiction. However, the addictive characteristics of narcotics and opioids and their direct link with overdose deaths is clear.

We have witnessed in our community how easily these deadly drugs are dispensed. A local doctor who allegedly prescribed nearly 3 million doses of opioids in just 19 months was charged recently with the death of five patients.

This doctor, and others, may have had help. Congressman Marino pushed a bill written by the pharmaceutical industry through Congress in 2016 making it easier for drugs to be pushed out into a community in large volumes without oversight by the Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA). According to many DEA officials, the pharmaceutical industry profited from this law, while putting communities, especially young people, at risk.

While the drug companies rack up huge profits, Trump’s economic advisers estimate that the opioid epidemic cost the nation more than $500 billion in 2015. Trump declared the crisis a public health emergency but has authorized no additional funding.

The federal government’s inability to act has led Gov. Wolf to take the extraordinary measure of declaring the opioid crisis a disaster emergency here in Pennsylvania. This temporary declaration waives 13 protocols and regulations and establishes the Opioid Operational Command Center. It is a start, but more must be done.

Marijuana is not the problem. For many, it is a legitimate medical treatment. We must put our resources into addressing the deadly opioid and narcotic crisis that is killing a record number of Americans. We must not deny patients access to a drug like cannabis that can help manage chronic illnesses without high risk of addiction.

There is only one solution. Congress must legalize marijuana. Rep. Thomas Garrett (R-VA) introduced H.R. 1227 to remove marijuana as a Schedule 1 drug and eliminate criminal penalties while allowing states to regulate marijuana as they see fit. Do your part to end federal prohibition. Tell your U.S. representative to sponsor and support H.R.1227.

58, 49, 14, 9, 26. These are not just numbers. These numbers represent real people murdered in senseless acts of violence; and underscore how mass shootings have become a part of America’s culture. When will it end?

Americans awoke Monday morning to another mass shooting tragedy. A gunman, armed with dozens of military-style weapons, took aim on unsuspecting concert-goers hundreds of feet below. He killed 58 and injured (some critically) over 400 people.

Las Vegas is an open carry state and allows one to legally carry firearms in public places. Hotels do not search guests’ luggage or require guests to pass through a metal detector. Would hotel staff have even raised an eyebrow if they had seen a guest check in with multiple firearms?

There are no limits on how many rifles or how much ammunition a person can purchase in Nevada. The guns used in this attack, as far as authorities can tell, were all acquired (and modified into even deadlier weapons) legally.

Ironically, this very week, House republicans in Congress were poised to pass legislation, backed strongly by the NRA, which would ease restrictions on gun silencers. The vote has been postponed (because of the latest shooting)…but not cancelled.

It’s hard to read the names of these victims. It is even harder to believe that so many Americans will choose to do nothing to prevent the next massacre.

Yet, we did nothing when 20 six-year olds were slaughtered in their own classroom. We did nothing when nine church-goers were shot in their own parish. We did nothing when 49 people were murdered in a nightclub. We did nothing when 12 people were killed in a movie theatre.

After the massacre at Sandy Hook Elementary School, there was hope that Congress would tighten up gun regulations to make it more difficult for the mentally ill to acquire guns. Some basic measures were implemented during the Obama administration; in February, Trump signed legislation to repeal them.

Other bills, including one that would close the private sale loophole on background checks, were all effectively stopped by the powerful gun lobby.

The NRA claims guns are not the problem. After all, according to popular talking points, cars kill more people than guns and a bag of manure can take down a building. But there is no comparison. Assault rifles are intended to kill as many people as possible in as short a period of time as possible. And our laws, or lack thereof, ensure easy access.

Now, I support one’s 2nd amendment rights to bear arms though the original intent of the 2nd amendment is widely debated. For instance, does every American gun owner belong to a well-regulated militia? If the 2nd amendment does allow for the weapons of today, that doesn’t mean controls cannot or should not be put in place.

The majority of Americans support stricter gun control measures. Democrats and some Republicans are calling for a ban on bump stocks–the device the killer used to make his rifles fire like automatic weapons. It is a start.

Do you agree? If so…now is the time to contact your members of Congress to express your support for this measure and other responsible gun control provisions.

Don’t forget these victims. Work to end gun violence today.

Nicole Faraguna is a founding member of the Susquehanna Valley Progressives.

The Latest

Dwayne Heisler of SEIU provided a fascinating glimpse into the history of American’s healthcare system. Our healthcare system is costly yet leaves tens of millions of Americans without coverage. Below find two resources that help explain the challenges we face here in Pennsylvania. Balanced Billing (PHAN) PA Affordability Report (PHAN)

Susquehanna Valley Progress is honored to award David A. Young with the Robert Ingersoll Forward Thinking Award this year for his lifetime commitment to free thought, education, peace, and justice. The award was presented at the group’s annual Networking Reception attended by dozens of fellow progressives. Anyone who has been involved locally with efforts related […]

Attend the networking reception for progressives in the Susquehanna Valley. Enjoy hearty appetizers and desserts, wine tasting, and good conversation. Meet new like-minded individuals and reconnect with those you know. RSVP NOW!

This past week the republican senate leaders hijacked efforts to pass sensible redistricting reform in Pennsylvania. Instead of moving bipartisan legislation forward that would have empowered the people of Pennsylvania in the redrawing of our legislative and congressional districts, a few powerful republican legislators took the opportunity to obliterate existing compromises, abandon any efforts to […]

Conservatives are proposing work requirements for Medicaid and Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) recipients — an unnecessary and cruel act that would actually result in the government spending more to administer these programs. Conservatives are attempting to fix a problem that doesn’t exist. To be fair, Republicans do not want to fix these programs, they […]